This invention relates generally to programming tools, and more particularly to translating code between computer architectures.
A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever. The following notice applies to the software and data as described below and in the drawings hereto: Copyright(copyright) 1998, Microsoft Corporation, All Rights Reserved.
In a new programming paradigm, a program is now a collection of components. Each component publishes an interface without exposing its inner details. Thus, a component can internally exist in any form: Intel x86 binary, Intel IA-64 binary, Visual Basic (VB) byte codes, Java class files, or any Virtual Machine (VM) binary. A heterogeneous program consists of components in different forms. Heterogeneous programs already exist in some environments: in the Microsoft Windows 32-bit environment, a Visual Basic program is compiled into VB byte codes that can call native-compiled functions in a separate dynamic linked library. Similarly Java class files can call native functions. Intel""s IA-64 architecture allows IA-64 code to co-exist with x86 code.
To understand the behavior of a heterogeneous program, all of its components, regardless of their form, have to be instrumented and analyzed in the same framework, otherwise, only partial information will be collected. It is important to note that systems that have been ported to several architectures are not sufficient to handle heterogeneous programs. For example, a system for VB byte codes that has been ported to x86 cannot provide a complete execution time analysis of a heterogeneous program consisting of VB byte codes and native x86 because each system operates in isolation on its own input.
Further, a heterogeneous program may consist of heterogeneous components. A heterogeneous component is a single component consisting of routines in different instruction sets. As the interface is well defined, components internally can use any instruction set. Each instruction set has its own advantages such as execution time, portability, and size.
All previous systems have been designed for homogeneous programs: conventional programs consisting of components in the same form. Some systems have been targeted to different architectures, but cannot work with heterogeneous programs. None of these systems can generate a heterogeneous component.
A large number of systems have been developed to help analyze and optimize homogeneous programs. The creation of xe2x80x9cPixiexe2x80x9d by MIPS Computers Systems, Inc. in 1986 started a class of basic block counting tools by inserting predetermined sequence of instructions to record execution frequencies of basic blocks. xe2x80x9cEpoxiexe2x80x9d extended the technique by using relocations to eliminate dynamic translation overheads. David W. Wall. Systems for late code modification, in Code Generationxe2x80x94Concept, Tools Techniques, pp. 275-293, (Robert Giegrich and Susan L. Graham, eds, 1992). xe2x80x9cQPTxe2x80x9d further extended the technique by constructing spanning trees to reduce the number of basic blocks that are instrumented. James Larus and Thomas Ball, Rewriting executable files to measure program behavior, Software, Practice and Experience, vol. 24, no. 2, pp 197-218 (1994). xe2x80x9cPurifyxe2x80x9d instruments memory references to detect out-of-bounds memory accesses and memory leaks. Reed Hastings and Bob Joyce, Purify: Fast Detection of Memory Leaks and Access Errors, Proceedings of Winter Usenix Conference, January 1992.
xe2x80x9cOMxe2x80x9d allowed general transformations to be applied to a binary by converting the binary to an intermediate representation that can be easily manipulated. Amitabh Srivastava and David Wall, A Practical System for Intermodule Code Optimization at Link Time, Journal of Programming Language, 1(1):1-18 (1993). OM has been implemented on MIPS, DEC Alpha and Intel x86 architectures. xe2x80x9cEELxe2x80x9d uses a similar technique and provides an editing library for Sun SPARC architectures. James R. Larus and Eric Schnarr, EEL: Machine-Independent Executable Editing, Proceedings of SIGPLAN"" 95 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (1995). xe2x80x9cAltoxe2x80x9d and xe2x80x9cSpikexe2x80x9d are optimizers for the DEC Alpha architectures. K. De Bosschere and S. Debray, Alto: a Link-Time Optimizer for the DEC Alpha. Technical Report TR-96-16, Computer Science Department, University of Arizona (1996). David W. Goodwin, Interprocedural Dataflow Analysis in an Executable Optimizer, Proceedings of SIGPLAN"" 97 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (1997).
xe2x80x9cATOMxe2x80x9d extended OM by providing a flexible instrumentation interface for the DEC Alpha and Intel x86 systems. Amitabh Srivastava and Alan Eustace, ATOM: A System for Building Customized Program Analysis Tools, Proceedings of SIGPLAN"" 94 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (1994). However, ATOM does not allow modifications to a binary. xe2x80x9cEtchxe2x80x9d provided a similar system for x86 and xe2x80x9cBITxe2x80x9d for Java byte codes. T. Romer, G. Voelker, D. Lee, A. Wolman, W. Wong, H. Levy, B. Chen, and B. Bershad, Instrumentation and Optimization of Win32/Intel Executables Using Etch, Proceedings of the USENIX Windows NT Workshop (1997). Han Lee and Benjamin Zorn, BIT: A Tool for instrumenting Java bytecodes. Proceedings of the 1997 USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems (1997).
None of these systems work on heterogeneous programs. Some of them have been ported to multiple architectures but they provide only a partial view when applied to heterogeneous programs as each implementation operates on its input in isolation. Although OM builds a symbolic representation, the representation is primarily designed for applying arbitrary transformations and is not sufficient to handle heterogeneous programs. None of these systems can generate heterogeneous components. ATOM provides a flexible interface for instrumentation only.
Therefore, there is a need to represent a heterogeneous program and its heterogeneous components in a fashion that permits a user to evaluate the behavior of the program to be evaluated across architectural boundaries and to optimize the entire program.
The above-mentioned shortcomings, disadvantages and problems are addressed by the present invention, which will be understood by reading and studying the following specification.
An application program interface (API) provides navigation, query, and modification functions to be performed on an intermediate representation (IR) of a heterogeneous program or component. The IR consists of platform-neutral instructions arranged in a hierarchy of elements common to all programming languages: code and data blocks, procedures, and components. The API is employed by an end user, pre-defined tools, and an output translator to add, delete, or modify the IR elements, to instrument the IR to gather statistics on its operation, to optimize the IR, and to output the IR into code for a specific architecture or architectures for execution. The basic navigation, query, and modification functions of the API are supplemented by specialized functions.
Because the API operates on the intermediate representation of the heterogeneous program or component, the caller of the API can examine and transform the code as a whole, crossing platform-specific boundaries, to achieve a more efficient program or component.